Machine gunners vs. infantry

[Eigenvector]

I'm not too sure about the odds here. When you want to pick a city defence, what is a better choice - infantry or machine gunners?

The infantry are str 20, but the machine gunners have +50% against gun powder units.

What do you all think here?

A second part to this, let's assume I do pick machine gunners, what is a good promotion - first strike or overstrength? I know some units are immune to first strikes but by the time you get machine gunners is that really an issue anymore?

 

[777]

Damn hard choice there if you look at odds. Remember that you can upgrade infantry +10% power and then +25% vs. gunpowder units. I believe that you can't upgrade Machine Gun with pinch.

But without upgrades Machine gun have more strenght than infantry if they meet. Biggest minus with Machine Gun is it's defensive play, you can attack with it and I hate it.

I barely build MGs them anyway.

 

[Duuk]

Machine guns are useful if you're being attacked or plan to be attacked. If you're on offense, infantry is a no-brainer.

 

[MrMahk]

Machine guns are useful if you're being attacked or plan to be attacked. If you're on offense, infantry is a no-brainer.

Well if you are on offense, it's always good to have at least 1 machine gun in your stack while you advance through enemy territory or defend your cannons/artillery while they are bombarding.

 

[Nook29]

I use Machine Guns for defense in cities, and the occasional infantry unit. Infantry is mainly for attack for me.

 

[Eigenvector]

Okay, now what about the second part. Which is a better promotion - overstrength or first strike? I always have a problem deciding this because its not obvious which promotion did the trick in combat. I typically pick first strike, but that has more to do with perceived gain rather than experience.

 

[Gary King]

I find it interesting that the overstrength is +25% first time then +10% second time, I believe? Well, whatever it is, First Strike always is +1 each time. So the increase amount is the same, but for strength, it isn't. Maybe it is better?

 

[romelus]

i don't build too many machineguns. they are fine defending against infantry, but as soon as tanks start pounding your cities MGs are screwed. better to have infantry with city defense or anti gunpowder promotions.

for the 2nd question i don't know. i usually go one strength and one first strike

 

[The Last Conformist]

I rarely build any MGs, but do end up with some upgraded ones.

 

[Ranos]

I have never built a machine gunner. They are nothing more than a waste of space. My reasons:

Machine Gunner: (Siege) 18 strength, +50% vs. Gunpowder, 1 first strike
Strength vs Guns: 27
Strength vs Armor: 18

Infantry: (Gunpowder) 20 strength, +25% vs. Gunpowder
Strength vs Guns: 25
Strength vs Armor: 20

Their base strength gives Machine Gunners the advantage vs gunpowder but Infantry has an advantage vs Armor.

Now add in promotions:
Machine Gunner:
Combat 1 vs Guns: 28.8
Combat 1 vs Armor: 19.8

Infantry:
City Garrison 1 vs Guns: 29
City Garrison 1 vs Armor: 24

The Machine Gunners first strike will still give it an edge vs. gunpowder units but with the advantage vs Armor, the Infantry ranks first in my mind. All you need is Barracks and you have that advantage immediately. Using civics, The Pentagon or West Point causes that advantage to grow:

Machine Gunner:
Combat 2 vs Guns: 30.6
Combat 2 vs Armor: 21.6
Combat 3 vs Guns: 32.4
Combat 3 vs Armor: 23.4

Infantry:
City Garrison 2 vs Guns: 34
City Garrison 2 vs Armor: 29
City Garrison 3 vs Guns: 40
City Garrison 3 vs Armor: 35

First strike or no first strike, Machine Gunners fall short of Infantry, IMO.

 

[Eigenvector]

Thanks, I never understood the promotions well enough to see it in the numbers.

I build machine guns because I generally get railroad before assembly line (I think that's right..) I rarely get assembly line quickly, preferring to spend my time persuing other techs that I left behind, so for a long while I only have machine gunners to defend my cities.

 

[Thalassicus]

The three problems I have with machine gunners are:

- Can't promote with City Garrison
- Lower strength than infantry vs tanks
- Upgrade to SAM infantry...

I've tried utilizing them, but they have such a limited timeframe and a marginally useful upgrade they end up being disbanded down the line. They just don't seem as great a use of hammers as Infantry or Marines. Railroad is also at the same place as Assembly Line; both are right after Steam Power.

 

[Kissamies]

Sometimes you can upgrade units with city garrison to machine gunners, though.

 

[The Last Conformist]

- Upgrade to SAM infantry

That one is indeed pretty strange.


To make the comparison with Infantry even worse for the MG, Marines effectively negate their bonus vs gunpowder units with their 50% attack bonus against siege.

 

[ybbor]

pardon my ignorance, but what is overstrength? Is this a new upgrade w/ the patch or an alternate name for another promotion?

 

[GeoModder]

No, it's simply Combat I to V.

 

[ybbor]

No, it's simply Combat I to V.

okay. Thank You. Gary King 's comments threw me

 

[Ranos]

Sometimes you can upgrade units with city garrison to machine gunners, though.

The only unit that can be upgraded to a Machine Gunner is a Grenadier. In that situation, I would say that Machine Gunners are useful, but that is the only time. It is a waste to build new ones though.

 

[flytyer]

I had some machine gunners that I got via upgraded Grenadiers and they were able to beat off a tank attack during war time. Thought this was interesting and since then I have put at least one MG in each city.

 

[romelus]

I had some machine gunners that I got via upgraded Grenadiers and they were able to beat off a tank attack during war time. Thought this was interesting and since then I have put at least one MG in each city.

well against tanks, MGs with city garrison are no better than infantry with city garrison, they are actually worse